Dave Hobson

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer].

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Dingell]. (Mr. DINGELL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Wolf]. (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that there is a lot of misapprehension and misunderstanding about what this amendment does. First, I would point out to some of the speakers after they have spoken that we do have the ``inappropriate in the workplace'' language. If Members will read the Packard amendment, I believe the Packard amendment leaves out the ability to discuss how the AIDS virus is transmitted, and I think this is a very important discussion that should go on. I agree with the fact that under the Bush administration, and under this administration, there appear to have been inappropriate training sessions. These should not have been approved and should not have gone on and I do not disagree with that at all. But I think we should not get away from the appropriate way to take care of that. I think we should allow these people to have these and to stay in them if they want to stay in them. I think, on the other hand, if they do not want to go, then they do not have to go. And if they do not want to go, they should not be able to kill the program for everybody else that wants to go.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Torkildsen].

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Maryland [Mrs. Morella]. [[Page H 7210]] (Mrs. MORELLA asked and was given permission to revise and extend her remarks.)

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Gilman]. (Mr. GILMAN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from California [Ms. Pelosi], a member of the committee.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Visclosky], a member of the subcommittee.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, the budget conference report we are voting on today is truly an extraordinary document that speaks well of the commitment this U.S. Congress has had of the goal of balancing the Federal budget by the year 2002 and preserving the economic health of our Nation for our next generation. Last month I stood in this Chamber holding my granddaughter, Katy, while I cast my vote for the House's balanced budget resolution. I have kept Katy in my mind and the children of her generation as we worked to forge the budget resolution, and then worked as a member of the Budget Committee conference committee. Katy and the children of her age are why we are here doing this today, preserving the future of young Americans is our underlying goal. Like my fellow conference committee members, I went to the conference committee committed to balanced the Federal budget and seeing the provisions of the House budget were implemented. I am proud to say that our Senate colleagues shared our commitment to a balanced budget and agreed with many of the key points of our plan. Each side in the conference was miles apart when we started on many issues, most noticeably the tax cut plan. However, these differences of opinion were not the stumbling block many critics thought they would be. We found agreement on most important issues and reached a compromise on others. Overall, however, I believe the principles laid out in the House plan were respected by the Senate, and our priorities received the attention they needed. This conference report is a testament to the spirit of cooperation and proof of what can happen when the good of the American people is kept as the leading priority. The report is fair and it is balanced. I encourage my colleagues to support it. We are keeping our promises to the American people.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, let me state one simple fact. The Democrats have no budget proposal. We worked long and hard on a budget, and let me state it again. At no time did the Democrats come forth with any budget proposal from the House. The President had a budget, yes, but did he take the trouble? No, he left us with $200 billion in the hole. He did not offer any response to the problems with Medicare or Medicaid, no proposals at all. So the President punted, just as the House Democrats punted in the Committee on the Budget, and now they have the audacity to come out here when we have proposals to help people for the future of our country, for our grandchildren and our children, and the middle income people in this country, they come out with a motion like this. I think it takes a lot of gall to come out and, while proposing nothing positive throughout this whole process, to come forth and say, ``We want to go a different direction now.'' What we are saying, ``Let's get on board, let's go in a direction for the future of our country, for our children.'' Greenspan says, if we want to have the same kind of life for our children, our grandchildren, we better get about balancing this budget. Defeat this motion to instruct.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Shays], a very valued member of the committee.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing the Health Information Modernization and Security Act with Mr. Sawyer. In the Senate, Mr. Bond and Mr. Lieberman introduced the same bill as S. 872. Our bipartisan, bicameral bill was developed over several years in an open, cooperative effort between the private and public sectors. Our purpose is to reduce excessive paperwork and administrative waste in the health care system by facilitating the development of an electronic health information network. Health information systems are on the verge of a dramatic transformation. Today, financial and administrative information commonly is keyed into a computer, printed in paper form, and then mailed or transmitted to another person who rekeys the information into another computer. The constant demand for more information in less time is pushing the current system toward electronic data interchange [EDI], the computer-to-computer exchange of information in a standard format. The technology exists today to move away from a paperwork system and toward an electronic health information network. Although many institutions have internally automated health information systems, there are barriers to sharing information externally, among institutions. First, no single entity in the health care industry has the market power to move the industry toward a common standard. Second, antiquated State licensing laws make computerized medical records technically illegal in 12 States and legally ambiguous in 16 others. Third, there are privacy concerns related to the degree of access to health information. The Health Information Modernization and Security Act removes the barriers that block the modernization and simplification of health information networks. Once these barriers come down, the private sector will be able to reduce unnecessary paperwork, which adds nearly 10 cents to every health care dollar; expose fraud in ways that are impossible under the confusing, disjointed paperwork system we have today; protect patient privacy and the confidentiality of health information; and provide consumers with the data they need to compare the value of insurance plans and health services. Basically, our bill sets up a process that moves the health care industry toward a common electronic language for sharing information. The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is required to adopt standards for health information, but only if those standards already are in use and generally accepted. The Secretary is required to adopt financial and administrative data standards, security standards, privacy standards for individually identifiable health information, and special rules for coordination of benefits, code sets, electronic signature, and unique health identifiers for individuals, employers, health plans, and health care providers. The Secretary is not required to adopt standards for clinical data or information in the patient medical record. Financial and administrative data often is handled electronically today, and there is general agreement on the type of standards that should be adopted. Clinical information, in contrast, is more complicated and there is little consensus on the quantity or content of the data that should be standardized. Further, adopting clinical standards involves complex privacy requirements and a debate about whether or not data should be centralized. However, after 4 years, but sooner than 6 years, the Secretary must recommend to Congress a plan for developing and implementing uniform, electronic data standards for information in the patient medical record. Within 2 years after the Secretary adopts the standards, health plans are required to comply. The mandate is on the payer, not the provider. Providers are required to comply with the standards for any business they do with Medicare. Payers and providers may deviate from the standards by mutual agreement. For example, a payer may agree to accept information on paper claims, but they are not required to accept that information if it is not in the standard format adopted by the Secretary. Similarly, a provider may agree to provide additional information requested by the payer, but they do not have to provide that information if it is not among the standards adopted by the Secretary. This creates the market-oriented leverage necessary to converge on a single industry standard. To conclude my remarks, I want to credit the work and commitment of the people behind this legislation. In 1991, Secretary of Health and Human Services Louis Sullivan articulated a vision of a health care information system. Mr. Bond first introduced legislation to achieve that vision in 1992, updated that work in 1993--Mr. Sawyer and I were the House sponsors--and now we introduce the final product of our continuing efforts here today--the Health Information Modernization and Security Act.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. We are working on it. announcement by the chairman

Mr. HOBSON. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I wish to respond to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Edwards] that something happened in the Committee on the Budget that has not happened in a long time since I have been there, but under Republican control we adopted an amendment of language in the bill concerning, ``The committee is also greatly concerned about the growing phenomena of millionaire and billionaire Americans renouncing U.S. Citizenship in order to avoid paying their fair share of their tax burden. The committee strongly believes that Congress should take steps to stem the revenue loss of expatriation for tax avoidance.'' That is in the bill and it was a Democrat amendment put up, and we adopted it.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I understand we disagree about the number, but obviously this thing, not you and the other people who put this up, the gentleman is helping us, and I want to thank him for that argument, because we agree that there is a problem and it needs to be fixed. I think this brings the legitimacy across the aisles to this argument that we need to get it done, even though we do not agree as to what you wind up with in your budget, but I want to thank the gentleman for doing it. I think it is going to be helpful to get us on the road.

Mr. HOBSON. I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman I want to commend the other side for helping us with an argument that we have been having with a number of people on their side of the aisle relating to the CPI. While we may disagree about what the number might be, apparently they have adopted and do not question the fact that the CPI is incorrect.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, the Federal Government has not run up a $4.7 trillion debt because the American people pay too little taxes. The huge debt and deficits have exploded because the Federal Government is too big, spends too much of your money, and tells too many people what to do. It is big government, stupid! Our balanced budget, for the first time in 25 years, solves this problem of oversized Government by reducing Government's size: It puts the bloated Federal Government on a diet. It eliminates the Federal deficit by trimming the size, power, intrusiveness, of the Federal Government. Past attempts to reduce the deficit, like the Clinton tax increases, have failed because they have not addressed the deficit's root cause: oversized Government. Every dime they have collected in increased revenues has been spent on government gimmicks, spending schemes, and partisan pork. Every dollar saved in reductions in defense since 1985 has gone to feed the Government, not reduce the deficit. Our balanced budget plan is different. Not only does our plan just say no to Clinton-style hikes. Our balanced budget actually includes tax relief for our families, small businesses, students, and seniors. Our balanced budget finally solves the problem of too much Washington. It puts the Government on a diet, returns power to families, neighborhoods, and communities, and restores the American dream. I urge all my colleagues to support this plan for the future of our children.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Chairman, I might point out that the previous speaker, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Clay], voted for the Clinton tax increase, the biggest one in this country's history, and it costs his district $520 million in new taxes. It is also interesting to note that he voted against the balanced budget amendment. We should take that into context when we review his remarks. [[Page H5121]] Mr. Chairman, we are coming up on what I expect to be the most important vote of my career in this House. Today we meet the challenge of balancing the Federal books and restoring fiscal security for America's next generation. Today we vote on, and I encourage my colleagues to vote for, the House Committee on the Budget resolution, and restore hope to that next generation. For 26 years, our Federal Government has spent more money than it has taken in, financing this debt by borrowing money. The legacy of chronic deficit spending is passed to our children as a $4.9 trillion national debt. Staying on this track will undoubtedly bankrupt our Nation. This subject has particular meaning for me right now, because my 15-month- old granddaughter is in town visiting. When I think why we are balancing the budget, I think of Katie. A lot of grandfathers think that way. My other daughter is going to have another baby, so you think a little differently about the future when you become a grandfather. I think a lot of people can equate to that. What this balanced budget is about, it will not allow her to have the same opportunity the rest of us have if we do not balance the budget. Putting the future of Katie and the other children in this country first is what balancing the Federal budget is all about. Protecting the next generation from a financial crisis means acting now in a decisive, responsible way. The House Committee on the Budget's 1996 budget resolution does this by balancing the Federal budget by the year 2002. We also close the doors on several agencies that run up costs but fail to contribute meaningfully to our Nation's well-being. Those operations that are useful are transferred to other agencies or sent back to the States. The waste and duplication is eliminated. Mr. Chairman, our budget also protects our children's future by preventing a crisis in Medicare, the health care system of our Nation's seniors. According to the Medicare trustees appointed by President Clinton, Medicare will run out of money in 7 years. Our budget resolution provides the structure needed to protect, preserve, and improve Medicare, and then it goes on to increase benefits to seniors from $4,816 for beneficiaries in 1995 to $6,376 in 2002. That is an impressive increase, by anyone's standards. Our budget also increases overall Government spending by $1.2 trillion over the next 7 years. That should be plenty to do the things we need to do at the Federal level. Where we can, we send programs back to the States and local governments. In total, this process of decentralization, together with the removal of duplication and waste, justifies eliminating 283 programs, 14 agencies, 68 commissions, and 3 departments: Energy, Commerce, and Education. This is just one path toward balancing the Federal books. Over the next few months, the committees of jurisdiction will map out the details. The job of balancing the budget is a challenge we can meet. When we are done, we will have a healthier, stronger Nation in solid financial shape for our children to inherit. I invite everyone here to join us in this historic effort, and rise to the challenge at hand. Vote yes on the Committee on the Budget's 1996 resolution, and keep hope and opportunity alive for the next generation. Announcement by the Chairman

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, where is the cut? House Democrats have come to the floor, claiming that Republicans are cutting Medicare. But I have to ask my colleagues, where is the cut? If you look at this simple chart, you will see that Republicans are not cutting Medicare at all. In fact, we are increasing Medicare spending per person from $4,700 to $6,300. So, where is the cut? In a liberal Democrat's mind, whenever you slow the growth of spending, whenever you weed out waste and fraud, whenever you give a bureaucrat his walking papers, that is a cut. But to the American taxpayers, these are not cuts. To senior citizens, these are not cuts. To people possessed of common sense, these are not cuts. These are reforms that preserve, protect and improve Medicare far into the next century. Mr. Speaker, I have to ask my colleagues, where is the cut?

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 606, the Dayton Aviation Preservation Heritage Act Amendments, which was introduced by my colleague Congressman Hall, and of which I am a cosponsor. The legislation would make technical corrections to the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act, which became law in the 102d Congress, and is identical to legislation approved by the House in the last Congress (H.R. 3559). The Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission is a Federal entity responsible for coordinating efforts at the Federal, State, and local levels to preserve and manage the historic resources of Miami Valley, OH, which is known for its aviation history. Public Law 102-419 established the Dayton Aviation Heritage National Historical Park and the Dayton Aviation Heritage Commission, and contained a mechanism whereby the Secretary of Interior could appoint members to the Commission. Although the appointment language in the law was identical to language used in the past to create similar such commissions, the administration found the language to be unconstitutional. H.R. 606 amends the Dayton Aviation Heritage Preservation Act to clarify that the Secretary of Interior need only consider the recommendations of others in making appointments to the advisory commission established by that law. This legislation is clearly technical in nature and would give the Secretary of Interior greater discretion in appointing members to the Commission. Again, this legislation is identical to that which was approved by the House, but did not receive Senate consideration. H.R. 606 is extremely important in allowing the Commission to carry out their mission--which is to work with the National Park Service in the preservation of aviation history--a significant aspect of Dayton's heritage which is associated with the Wright Brothers and the early development of aviation. I would also like to point out that there is no cost involved with this bill. Mr. Hall and I, along with the Miami Valley community have worked together to create the Dayton Aviation Heritage Park, a park that will bring to life the story of the Wright Brothers and the place where they grew up, invented the plane, and learned to fly. This legislation is necessary to ensure the preservation of Dayton's aviation history. Mr. Speaker, I urge support of this legislation.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, our Contract With America states the following: On the first day of Congress, a Republican House will require Congress to live under the same laws as everyone else; cut committee staffs by one-third, and cut the congressional budget. We kept our promise. It continues that in the first 100 days, we will vote on the following items: A balanced budget amendment--we kept our promise; unfunded mandates legislation--we kept our promise; line-item veto--we kept our promise; a new crime package to stop violent criminals--we kept our promise; national security restoration to protect our freedoms--we kept our promise; Government regulatory reform--we kept our promise; commonsense legal reform to end frivolous lawsuits--we plan to complete that today; Welfare reform to encourage work, not dependence; family reinforcement to crack down on deadbeat dads and protect our children; tax cuts for middle-income families; senior citizens' equity act to allow our seniors to work without Government penalty, and congressional term limits to make congress a citizen legislature. This is our Contract With America.

Mr. HOBSON

Mr. HOBSON. Mr. Speaker, our Contract With America states the following: On the first day of Congress, a Republican House will require Congress to live under the same laws as everyone else; cut committee staffs by one-third; and cut the congressional budget. We kept our promise. It continues that in the first 100 days, we will vote on the following items: A balanced budget amendment--we kept our promise; unfunded mandates legislation--we kept our promise; line-item veto--we kept our promise; a new crime package to stop violent criminals--we kept our promise; national security restoration to protect our freedoms--we kept our promise; Government regulatory reform--we are doing this now; welfare reform to encourage work, not dependence; family reinforcement to crack down on deadbeat dads and protect our children; tax cuts for middle-income families; Senior Citizens' Equity Act to allow our seniors to work without Government penalty; commonsense legal reform to end frivolous lawsuits; and congressional term limits to make Congress a citizen legislature. This is our Contract With America. Mr. Speaker, this is our contract, we are doing it and living up to it, and I believe it is alive and well.